Filing a Petition - German Civil Procedure

English Language in a German Lawsuit?

[column width=“1/1″ last=“true“ title=““ title_type=“single“ animation=“none“ implicit=“true“]

Translation costs in international litigation can exceed court and lawyer fees

In a legal dispute between an American or British business on the one side and a German business on the other side, the first things lawyers usually look at are jurisdiction, venue and applicable law. The party that finds itself having a „home game“, i.e. the party litigating at their local court, usually feels they have a strategic advantage. And indeed, if a lawsuit takes place in one’s own country and the applicable law is the law one’s own employees, inhouse counsels and go-to litigation lawyers already on retainer are familiar with, this makes matters easier.

However, there is one aspect which is often overlooked when international contracts are drafted. That’s the issue of procedural language, i.e. the simple question: What is the language of the civil court the parties have chosen? This post explains why the procedural language of the competent court is just as important as applicable law and jurisdiction itself.

Court language can be a huge cost factor

Let’s assume I represent a German company which manufactures high tech equipment and exports the same to the USA through a distributor in California. When the contract was negotiated a few years ago, my German client managed to get the US distributor to accept the jurisdiction of German state courts and German law to apply in case of a legal dispute between the parties. Sounds great, right? So, where is the problem for the German plaintiff?

Well, as is very common in US-German (and British-German) business relationships, the contract and all appendices are in English. What’s even more important: all correspondence between the parties, every purchase order, acknowledgement of delivery, memorandum, meeting minutes and pretty much every single email and letter exchanged between the parties are in the English language as well.

This poses a huge practical problem for either party in case they wish to sue the other party, because a German court of law — and this is hardly surprising — accepts only German language documents. The German Courts Consitution Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz, GVG) in section 184 orders in no uncertain terms:

„The language of the court shall be German.“

In theory, the German court is permitted by law to hear foreign language witnesses in their native tongue if, as section 185 (2) of the Court Constitution Act states:

„An interpreter may be dispensed with if all the persons involved have a command of the foreign language.“

But in real life this very rarely happens because one party usually objects, even if just for the reason to annoy the other party and to run up their legal costs.

Certified translations of thousands of pages

And with regard to written documents, section 185 (2) GKG would not be of any help anyway. Therefore, the party that wants to file a complaint or petition must provide to the German civil court all documents relevant for the case both in the original version and as a certified translation. Depending on what the civil lawsuit is based on, this can be hundreds of even thousands of pages. Translation costs in such cases can easily exceed court fees or — in extreme cases — even legal fees.

What makes such lawsuits even more complex and cumbersome: The parties and their legal counsels are not always happy with the translation results. In business litigation, the meaning of a specific term used by a party in the contract, but also in letters, meeting minutes or emails can decide the lawsuit. Thus, the parties sometimes quarrel intensely about the question of whether the German word used by the translator catches the true meaning of the English word in the original document. This sometimes turns into a lawsuit within the lawsuit and fills the lawyer’s time sheets.

English language witnesses in German courts

A similar problem poses itself with regard to witnesses and experts. If English speaking witnesses must be heard in a German civil court, the standard rule is that an interpreter must be present. The exception I have mentioned above (section 185 GVG) is in most cases only a theoretical option. Such interpreters make the court hearings cumbersome and tedious, not to mention the costs. In most cases, the judge, the parties as well as their lawyers have already perfectly understood what the witness had explained in English. Sometimes, the parties have a better understanding of specific technical terminology than the interpreter does. Still, the translation by the interpreter must be heard out and — what is even more important — this German translation, good or bad, will find its way into the official court records, not what the witness has originally stated in English.

Better alternatives?

Any experienced contract lawyer will bear this practical problem in mind and discuss the isue of procedural language with their client very early on. If, in a business relationship, it is clear from the beginning that all or most correspondence and documentation will be in one language (e.g. English), it hardly makes any sense to stipulate in the contract the jurisdiction of a court that works in another language (e.g. German).

In situations like these, the parties could opt for arbitration and agree on the procedural language creating the least hassle, which in most cases will probably be English. That way, if they want to, the parties are able to combine German substantive law with English language for the arbitration procedure. In many cases a fair compromise.

Of course, the parties can also mutually decide to opt for such English language arbitration after a dispute has already emerged, even if the contract states something else, for example the jurisdiction of German state courts. However, once the parties have started to „go legal“, one side is usually no longer willing to agree to such a change, because they would give up the “home game advantage”. Yet, in certain situations it may be worth asking the other side, especially if both parties plan to make claims and are thus both faced with the identical problem of having to provide tons of certified translations and costly interpreters for English language witnesses.

For legal advice on German civil procedure and how to successfully litigate in Germany, contact the international litigation experts and trial lawyers of GrafLegal.

Copyright & Disclaimer All posts are copyrighted material. This blog is made available by Graf & Partners for educational purposes as well as to give you general information on German law, not to provide specific legal advice. Simply reading this blog does, of course, not result in any attorney client relationship between you and Graf & Partners. The blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice provided by a licensed professional attorney in a specific legal matter.

[/column]

Disinheritance Lawsuits are very common in Germany

Under German Succession Law, close Relatives can always claim a Share in the Estate, even if they were explicitly disinherited

For American and British estate and probate lawyers, German inheritance laws (Erbrecht), i.e. the statutory rules of succession and probate as laid out in the 5^th Book of the German Civil Code, are full of surprises. Pleasant or unpleasant, as the case may be.

One of the more unpleasant examples is the fact that under German succession law, an heir can become fully liable for all of the deceased’s debts. This unfortunate result occurs automatically, i.e. by statutory German law, if he or she does not formally renounce the inheritance within a certain deadline (for details see the post: Indebted German Estate: How to avoid inheriting your German Relatives’ Debts).

This post, however, deals with happier news, at least from the perspective of the respective beneficiaries. Testators, who do not wish to leave their wealth to their offspring, their spouse or their parents, are less amused by the restrictions imposed on them by German inheritance law.

German children always inherit. Even if they were disinherited!

German succession law grants a statutory, indefeasible compulsory share (Pflichtteil) in the deceased’s estate to certain close relatives of the deceased. This means they are entitled to a portion of the estate, even if they have been explicitly cut out of the testator’s last will and testament.

Relatives who are entitled to claim this “German forced share” are:

the descendants (children, grandchildren etc);
the surviving spouse; and
the parents of the deceased, but only if the testator leaves no surviving children.

This compulsory share, which is similar to an elective share of a spouse in certain US states, is regulated in section 2303 German Civil Code:

Person entitled to a compulsory share of the estate; amount of the share

(1) If a descendant of the testator is excluded by disposition mortis causa from succession, he may demand his compulsory share from the heir. The compulsory share is one-half of the value of the share of the inheritance on intestacy.

(2) The parents and spouse of the testator have the same right if they have been excluded from succession by disposition mortis causa. The provision of section 1371 remains unaffected.

In other words: German testators are constricted when making a will

They cannot leave all of their estate to whoever they please, because the German Pflichtteil law entitles close relatives of the decedent (offspring, spouse, parents) to receive a “minimum portion” of the estate. Even if the testator cannot stand those relatives and has thus explicitly disinherited them in a valid German will. The term “minimum portion“ sounds harmless and one may think: well let that relative have their small claim of 5-10 per cent of the estate.

However, the German Pflichtteil can be up to 50 percent of the entire estate value, depending on the family situation! This is because the Pflichtteil is defined as being half of what the disinherited relative would otherwise have inherited under German intestacy rules, i.e. had the testator not left a will. The actual percentage of the German compulsory share in a specific case therefore depends on who survives the testator. The German rules of intestacy are explained in more detail in the post: Most Germans die without a Will.

Can you inherit from your German relatives even if you’re cut out of the will?

How is all this relevant for citizens of the USA or Great Britain? Well, if you have close relatives that are resident in Germany (or Austria, France, Spain etc), you may be entitled to a significant portion of their estate, without even knowing it. If, for instance, an estranged parent or child who lived in Germany passes away — either without mentioning you or even explicitly disinheriting you in their will — you are still entitled to claim the German compulsory share.

Mind: You can, but you do not have to. In many cases, German children never actually make that claim, especially when both their parents have set up a so called joint will (Berliner Testament) in which they appoint each other as their respective sole heirs. Here, the children of the couple are technically disinherited because under German intestacy rules, the surviving spouse and the surviving child / children would be co-heirs (more on the German „Erbengemeinschaft“, i.e. community of heirs in this post). In these cases, if the family is intact, the children would not dream of making their surviving mom or dad pay the forced share. The children just let it go.

If the person entitled to a Pflichtteil does not actively demand payment of the forced share, it will eventually become statute barred. The claim expires after 3 years from the time you have been notified of the fact that a close relative has passed away and that you have been disinherited. More on limitation of civil claims in Germany in the post: Limitation under German Law

A technicality for estate lawyers: Please note that a forced share claim under German law is not made against „the estate“ (represented by the personal representative) as would be the case in most common law jurisdictions. Instead, the claim is made against the heir (or community of heirs). An important difference if the claimant goes to court in Germany.

In which scenarios do German succession rules apply to an estate?

The German and European Union perspective is simple: For any deaths on or after August 17, 2015, all EU member countries (except for UK, Ireland and Denmark) apply the same basic rule, which states that the national succession laws of that country shall apply in which the testator has held his or her last habitual residence (for details see the EU Succession Regulation, EU 650/2012).

What is the actual percentage of the German compulsory share?

As shown above, this depends on who survives the testator. Here are two examples how the German Pflichtteil share of a surviving relative is determined:

A widow living in Germany is survived by her only child but she disinherits said child and leaves everything to the church. Here, if there was no will, the sole child would be the sole heir under German intestacy rules. The Pflichteil is half of that, i.e. ½ share of the entire estate.
A German couple has three children. One of the children is a no-good drug addict who has always created nothing but trouble. Thus, the spouses write German wills in which they appoint each other as their respective sole beneficiaries. When the first spouse dies, the surviving spouse would – under German intestacy rules — be entitled to 1/2 of the estate and the three children to the other half of the estate, i.e. 1/6 each. Since they are disinherited by the will, each child is entitled to 1/12 compulsory share. In practice, this means they can demand payment of that amount from the surviving parent.

As becomes clear from these examples, a German forced share claim can range from a very small percentage, if there is a surviving spouse and many children, to a maximum of one half of the entire estate, if a widow(er) disinherits the only child.

Even lifetime gifts are relevant for the calculation of the Pflichtteil

As explained above, the forced share is calculated from the entire net estate (Nachlassvermögen), i.e. the assets owned by the decedent at the date of death minus his debts and funeral costs. Now, a testator may try to circumvent said compulsory share by making lifetime gifts. Then, the estate at the time of his or her death would be hollowed out.

To prevent this, German succession law orders that all lifetime gifts made by the testator within a period of ten years prior to their death is added to the value of the estate. Such gifts are thus also basis for calculation of the forced share. This part of the claim is called Pflichtteilsergänzungsanspruch. The heirs must therefore also disclose any such gifts to the disinherited Pflichtteil claimant.

Only in Germany?

No, the concept of a forced or elective share also exists in many other European jurisdictions like Austria and France. In fact, most countries that have been influenced by the French Code Civil (Code Napoleon) do apply even stricter rules of so called “forced heirship” (Mindesterbteil).

While the German Pflichtteil claim is merely a surrogate, i.e. a monetary claim which does not give the claimant any title with regard to specific assets (e.g. a piece of real estate or a business), under the stricter French law forced heirship rules, the entitled persons are actual statutory co-heirs, i.e. co-owners and co-possessors of the estate. In Germany, that is not the case. Here, the Pflichtteil claimant can “only” demand a payment from the heir(s).

How to make the Pflichtteil claim?

German statutes on forced share are very strict. If a claimant demands the Pflichtteil, the heir (or community of heirs) must immediately disclose the full estate inventory as well as any significant lifetime gifts made by the testator during the last 10 years prior to his or her death. In some cases, even lifetime gifts that were made 30 or 40 years prior can be relevant for the forced share claim.

Based on this information about the estate and lifetime gifts the forced share claimant will then demand payment which is due immediately, even if the estate consisted of real estate only and the heir does not have any liquid funds available.

If the heirs are being uncooperative or if they try to dodge either their disclosure obligations or payment, the Pflichtteil claimant can – and probably will — go to court immediately. Such forced share claims are usually slam dunk lawsuits for the claimant because there is hardly any defense against the claim. In exceptional circumstances, the German heirs may argue “unworthiness to inherit” according to s. 2339 German Civil Code. But a glance at the statute’s wording immediately shows that this refers only to very extreme situations:

Grounds for unworthiness to inherit

(1) A person is unworthy to inherit:

if he has intentionally and unlawfully killed or attempted to kill the deceased, or has put him in a state as a result of which the deceased was incapable until his death of making or revoking a disposition mortis causa,

if he has intentionally and unlawfully prevented the deceased from making or revoking a disposition mortis causa,

if he has, by deceit or unlawfully by duress, induced the deceased to make or revoke a disposition mortis causa,

if he is, in respect of a disposition mortis causa made by the deceased, guilty of a criminal offence under the provisions of sections 267, 271 to 274 of the Criminal Code [Strafgesetzbuch].

(2) In the cases set out in subsection (1) nos. 3 and 4, unworthiness to inherit does not occur if, before the occurrence of the devolution of the inheritance, the disposition that the testator was induced to make or in respect of which the criminal offence was committed has become ineffective, or the disposition which he was induced to revoke would have become ineffective.

In summary

If a close relative of yours lives and dies in Germany, chances are that you are entitled to claim a portion of the estate. In order to evaluate and assess that claim, German law gives you the right to demand full disclosure from the testamentary heirs, i.e. to be sent a detailed estate inventory and appraisals. Once the amount of the forced share has been calculated, payment of said forced share is due immediately and in full. In case the heirs try to give you a difficult time you can – and should — go to court immediately.

More information on German inheritance laws, contested probate cases and German inheritance tax in these posts:

For legal advice on German civil procedure and how to successfully litigate in Germany, contact the international litigation experts and trial lawyers of GrafLegal.

„I will press Criminal Charges if you don’t pay!“

Threatening someone to press criminal charges in Germany: Smart strategy or criminal offense?

Does German law permit claimants (or their lawyers) to threaten a debtor with pressing criminal charges against the debtor in case he or she refuses to pay a civil claim? Will a German lawyer have to face disciplinary sanctions when putting undue pressure on the opponent or their legal counsel?

All of this depends entirely on the circumstances of the case and the nature of the threat which is being used. This post explains if and to what extent the parties to a civil dispute in Germany are permitted to threaten each other with initiating criminal prosecution (Strafverfolgung) if the other side does not acknowledge the civil claim in dispute.

Legitimate use of pressure or criminal behaviour?

If you have a civil claim against someone, let’s say a contractual payment claim against a trustee, and you are convinced that your claim can also be based on tort, e.g. embezzlement or fraud, then it is perfectly legitimate under German law to threaten the debtor with a statement like:

“Unless you make full payment until the end of the week, I will not only sue you in civil court but will also press criminal charges against you for embezzlement.”

Under German law, in the above circumstances, a threat to press criminal charges constitutes neither coercion (Nötigung, see section 240 German Criminal Code) nor extortion / blackmailing (Erpressung, section 253 German Criminal Code) because there is a direct link between the actual claim and the criminal charges. The German criminal courts call this requirement of a direct connection “innerer Zusammenhang”.

German lawyers must be careful when issuing threats

The situation changes, however, if the claimant threatens the debtor with something that is not directly linked to the actual claim. The following threat would therefore be considered illegal extortion (Erpressung) or coercion (Nötigung) under German law:

“If you do not repay the loan I gave you, I will inform the German tax authorities about your money laundering schemes in Switzerland which I happen to know of.”

For instance, the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) Düsseldorf, in the judgment dated September 11, 1995, case file no. 5 Ss 220/95 – 26/95, found a German attorney at law (Rechtsanwalt) guilty of coercion (Nötigung), because the lawyer had threatened the defendant to notify the German immigration authorities in order to get him departed as an illegal alien if he does not pay the civil claim. In that case, there was no connection between the payment claim and the threat. Issuing such an unrelated threat to cause harm in order to force that person to do something which that person would otherwise not do, is unlawful both under German civil law (making an agreement or payment void) and German criminal law.

Threats must not be excessive

Furthermore, even if there is a direct link between what you want the other party to do (e.g. pay a debt, sign or terminate a contract, move out of a flat etc.) and the criminal charges you threaten them with, then such threat is still considered illegal if the consequences you threaten with are so severe that its use must be considered excessive (unproportional). The German legal word in this context is “unverhältnismäßig”.

Thus, while there is no explicit rule in the Code of Professional Conduct for German Lawyers which makes it unethical for a German lawyer to threaten to take opponents to criminal court in order to gain an advantage in a civil case, one must be very careful when issuing such “if you don’t …, then I will …” threats. Such threats can backfire and hurt the client’s case.

For details on where German law draws the line between permitted exertion of pressure on the opponent of a civil dispute and the use of illegal threats see the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) judgment of November 19, 1953, case file no. 3 StR 17/53.

What does „Pressing Criminal Charges“ even mean in Germany?

This blog deals primarily with Civil Procedure Rules. Still, let me briefly explain what „pressing criminal charges“ means in German legal practise. The German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch) distinguishes between two kinds of crimes:

Antragsdelikte pursuant to s. 77 et seqq. German Criminal Code, i.e. criminal offenses which will only be prosecuted if the victim does actively press charges by filing a „request to prosecute“ within a certain period of time; within this category are minor criminal offenses like simple trespassing (Hausfriedensbruch).
Offizialdelikte, i.e. criminal offences which will be prosecuted whenever the authorities learn of such a crime, even if the victim does not want the perpetrator to be prosecuted.

Thus, with regard to the topic of this post, making a threat to „press charges“ will in most cases simply mean that someone threatens to inform the German authorities about the (alleged) offense. Rarely, the offense will be a real „Antragsdelikt“, i.e. an offense which can only be prosecuted if and as long as the victim files a request to prosecute. In most case, the alleged crime will be an „Offizialdelikt“. In practise, this means that once the claimant has actually followed through with the threat, i.e. has informed the German police or prosecutor (Staatsanwaltschaft), then the matter is out of his hands and can’t be retracted. Now, the other party no longer has any reason to comply with the claimants demands. In other words: a threat to press charges in Germany only works as leverage as long as you do not actually use it.

More on litigation in Germany in these posts:

For legal advice on German civil procedure and how to successfully litigate in Germany, contact the international litigation experts and trial lawyers of GrafLegal.

Court Records in Germany

German Civil Court Case Files are not Public Records

U.S. lawyers do naturally assume that court files are public records and can be easily accessed and inspected by the public. Not so in Germany! As with, for instance, land registry information (see here), Germany is rather secretive when it comes to legal documents. Under German law, there is no general right to access court records in order to inspect and to copy the same. Instead, the written elements of a German civil lawsuit (lawyer’s statements, witness statements, expert opinions etc.) are considered to be a private and confidential matter, what is called „vertraulich“ in German.

Are German court hearings open to the public?

Pursuant to section 169 German Courts Constitution Act, the court hearings themselves are in principle open to the public, except for family law cases, non-contentious probate proceedings and other sensitive matters. Audio and television recordings or transmissions during court hearings are, however, strictly prohibited in Germany. When you see TV coverage relating to a German trial (be it a civil trial or a criminal court), the footage you may see on TV is made before the judge opens the proceedings. Once the German court is in session, no recordings must be made and no pictures must be taken.

Written pleadings and submissions are not available to any third parties

While the hearing itself is thus public, the written statements submitted by the parties and/or their lawyers (in German referred to as „Schriftsatz“) are not. Neither are witness statements or expert reports. This is codified in section 299 para (2) German Code of Civil Procedure:

Inspection of Court Files

(2) Without the consent of the parties to a legal proceeding, the (…) court (…) may allow third parties to inspect the files only if these third parties have demonstrated a legitimate interest to see the court file.

Such „legitimate interest“ (in German „berechtigtes Interesse“) is defined rather narrowly by German courts. The fact that a U.S. law firm represents a client who considers suing the same defendant does not per se constitute legitimate interest to see the German court file. This means that a potential plaintiff (or their lawyers) cannot simply find out by accessing court records what the legal counsel of another plaintiff has already argued in a certain case. The only option is to contact the legal counsel of a party and ask them whether they are willing to disclose their material, which obviously also requires the respective client’s consent.

What about German Judgments?

Final judgments by German civil courts are available to third parties without having to demonstrate a legitimate interest. However, even these judgments are not public records in the sense that they would be freely accessible online. Instead, one must write to the court and ask for a copy of the specific judgment (against payment of a court fee and reimbursement for costs). This judgment will then be sent to the applicant, but only in an anonymized version, i.e. alle names and addresses of the parties, their legal counsel and the witnesses will be blackened. The same is true when German judgments are published in German legal literature (juristische Fachzeitschriften). Even if everyone knows who the parties in the case were, the names and addresses are not cited.

Pursuant to s. 299 para (4) German Civil Procedure Code, the court will never disclose the following parts of a german case file: drafts of judgments, orders, and rulings; the work supplied in preparing them; as well as the documents concerning the court’s coordination with others (e.g. experts).

For legal advice on German civil procedure and how to successfully litigate in Germany, contact the international litigation experts and trial lawyers of GrafLegal.

Fast Lane Civil Procedure in Germany

How to obtain a German judgment many months earlier than by way of a „standard“ lawsuit

In certain situations, the German Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung) allows the plaintiff to file a fast track civil lawsuit, the so called „Urkunden-, Wechsel- und Scheckprozess“. The standard expression used by German lawyers is „Urkundsprozess“, which translates into „deed claim proceedings“.

These special „deed claim proceedings“ (besondere Verfahrensarten) in a German civil court must not be confused with temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions (einstweilige Verfügungen, einstweilige Anordnungen), which are also available in Germany but have very different requirements, inter alia urgency (Dringlichkeit).

What is an Urkundsprozess?

In order to file a German „deed claim proceeding“, the plaintiff must not demonstrate any urgency at all. Instead, the deed claim lawsuit route is available to any plaintiff who is able to substantiate his or her claim by providing to the court specific documents, inter alia deeds (Urkunden), checks (Schecks), promise to pay notes (Schuldscheine), acceptance bills etc.

These special Urkundsprozess proceedings are regulated by s. 592 et seqq. German Civil Procedure Rules. In order to be able to opt for this procedural route, the plaintiff must be able to prove the claim entirely bydocumentary evidence (Urkundenbweis). In other words: The Plaintiff must produce one or more documents, in the original, which fully prove the claim. There must be no need for additional evidence. If, for instance, the plaintiff needs to call a witness for certain facts in order to prove the claim, then the fast track proceedings are not available and the plaintiff must file a „normal“ civil procedure case.

The most evident example of when a Urkundsprozess is admissible is when the plaintiff is in possession of an original IOU (Schuldschein) signed by the debtor. Then the complaint (statement of claim, in German „Klageschrift“) is as simple as it can possibly get:

„The Defendant owes the client EUR xxx as evidenced by the promise to pay note dated xxx and hereby submitted to the court as an original.“

In a situation like this, the plaintiff has the option to file the lawsuit as a standard civil proceeding (Klageverfahren) or as „deed claim proceeding “ (Klage im Urkundsverfahren).

Why opt for the fast lane civil procedure?

The advantage of the fast track „deed claim proceeding“ for the plaintiff is that the defendant may — at that stage — only defend himself against the claim with documentary evidence. In the above example, it may well be the case that the defendant had already repaid the debt in cash, but has not been given back the original IOU (maybe because the plaintiff had lied to him about having lost the IOU). In a situation like this, the defendant is unable to prove by way of documentary evidence that the debt has already been repaid. He will thus lose the lawsuit in the fast track lane because here he is not allowed to name witnesses etc. The plaintiff is awarded a „deed claim proceeding judgment“ which he can immediately use to enforce the claim against the debtor.

Before you lose your faith in the German legal system, let me clarify: That is, of course, not the end of the story. The judgment in the fast track proceeding is not yet final. The defendant can apply to the court for the case to remain pending (Nachverfahren), see s. 599 et seq. German Cicil Procedure Code. If the defendant choses to do so, the lawsuit is continued as a „normal“ civil case where all types of evidence are admissible (see „Evidence in German Civil Litigation“). Now, the defendant can attempt to prove that the plaintiff has already been repaid, for instance by naming a witness who was present when the repayment was made, or a witness who has heard the plaintiff say that he has already received the money. If the defendant wins in this second stage (Nachverfahren), the first judgment will be declared void and the plaintiff must compensate the defendant for any costs and other damages incurred.

Thus, a plaintiff should only opt for the fast track if he or she is confident that the claim will also stand the test of a possible later standard civil trial. If the plaintiff does firmly believe in the claim, the fast track route should be recommended by the German trial lawyer, because it will enable the claimant to enforce the claim months or even years earlier. Another huge advantage of a judgment resulting from fast track proceedings is that those judgments can be enforced immediately and without having to post security for costs, see section 708 German Civil Procedure Rules.

Practical tips for German contract lawyers

Smart contract lawyers who are aware of the German deed claim proceeding route, will always strive to word contracts in such a way which will later permit their client to opt for the fast track lawsuit. If, for example, you represent a client who desires to work as an external consultant for a German company on a monthly fixed fee basis, you can draft the payment clause like this:

Company shall pay Consultant a monthly fee of EUR 5,000.

In that case, if the German company does not pay, there is hardly a way for the consultant to chose the fast track route, because the consultant will be unable to prove with documentary evidence that the company has not paid him. The situation changes, however, if you word the clause like this:

Company shall pay Consultant a monthly fee of EUR 5,000 which must be transferred onto the Consultants bank account held with X-bank, bank account number 123 456, and which must be credited to said account until the third workday of said month.

Now, the consultant is able to file a deed claim proceeding, because he can now prove the entire claim by submitting to the court (i) an original signed version of the agreement and (ii) an original bank statement for the relevant period from which is apparent that the amount has not been credited to the specified account.

Find more information on litigation in Germany in these posts:

For legal advice on German civil procedure and how to successfully litigate in Germany, contact the international litigation experts and trial lawyers of GrafLegal.

English Language in a German Lawsuit?

Translation costs in international litigation can exceed court and lawyer fees

Court language can be a huge cost factor

Certified translations of thousands of pages

English language witnesses in German courts

Better alternatives?

Related posts:

„I will press Criminal Charges if you don’t pay!“

Threatening someone to press criminal charges in Germany: Smart strategy or criminal offense?

Legitimate use of pressure or criminal behaviour?

German lawyers must be careful when issuing threats

Threats must not be excessive

What does „Pressing Criminal Charges“ even mean in Germany?

More on litigation in Germany in these posts:

Court Records in Germany

German Civil Court Case Files are not Public Records

Are German court hearings open to the public?

Written pleadings and submissions are not available to any third parties

What about German Judgments?

Related posts:

Fast Lane Civil Procedure in Germany

How to obtain a German judgment many months earlier than by way of a „standard“ lawsuit

What is an Urkundsprozess?

Why opt for the fast lane civil procedure?

Practical tips for German contract lawyers

Find more information on litigation in Germany in these posts:

REGENSBURG OFFICE

CONTACT US

MUNICH OFFICE